Skip to content
Sacramento State

Sacramento State Hornets

Mid-American·1-2·
Compare
Elo
1476#71
SP+
-19.1#125
FPI
-18.4
AP
NR
Nextvs North Dakota State · Wk 3Win prob 66%Model -6.8
Talent #114 (561.4)Recruiting class #125

Team Leaders

Roster · 116 players

FR 37SO 22JR 31SR 26
#PlayerPosClHtWt
6Brian SalazarQBSO6'3"170
8Jackson SharmanQBJR6'1"195
11Jaylen PattersonQBFR6'2"193
17Carson ConklinQBJR6'1"190
18Liam MeekerQBFR6'2"210
0Daniel SwinneyRBJR5'10"225
1Jamar CurtisRBSR5'8"175
3Cincere RhaneyRBSO5'10"210
14Curron BordersRBSO5'7"191
20Bryant CollinsRBJR6'0"191
22Isaiah EneRBFR5'8"212
23Elias BrownRBSR6'0"226
25Davion GodleyRBJR5'8"213
34Montrell RiceRBFR6'0"230
2Matt ColemanWRSR6'0"173
4Kenyon ShabazzWRJR6'4"185
5Raiden BrownWRSO5'11"175
7Khai TaylorWRJR6'2"172
9Ajon BryantWRSO5'6"162
10Jace WilsonWRSR6'4"212
12Onterrio Smith Jr.WRJR6'2"189
13Ellijah WashingtonWRFR5'10"162
14Drey GarnerWRFR6'0"193
15Dezmyn HardyWRFR6'6"188
19Guy Fernandez IIIWRFR6'0"171
21Kenneth PeevyWRFR5'9"160
80Carlton PerrilliatWRFR6'3"185
81Matthew AuauWRFR6'3"185
83Jaxon FresquesWRSO5'7"167
16Jordan WilliamsTESR6'5"222
82Kyle KoontzTESO6'4"224
84Jahlil LindseyTEFR6'6"235
85Elijah HuddleTESO6'3"220
86Jack HodgeTEFR6'4"210
87Luke MeekerTEFR6'2"210
88Cedric AntonTEJR6'2"248
53Elijah OrtizOLSR6'1"305
54Shontrail KeyOLSR6'5"290
55Garrison BlankOLFR6'7"328
56Jeremiah PonceOLFR6'3"305
57Luke SlaterOLSO6'2"275
58Daniel MataeleOLFR6'6"360
63Jamin GuilbertOLJR6'5"311
64Brandon SousaOLSR6'4"313
65Giovanni KovacsOLSO6'4"309
66Hayden FrazierOLJR6'3"286
68Davis MayOLJR6'4"339
70Jaxon MooreOLFR6'6"312
71Bryson SummersOLSR6'5"329
72Shaan LathanOLJR6'4"350
74Vae SoifuaOLSR6'4"308
75DeAnthony SheffieldOLJR6'3"329
76Alex KenwardOLSO6'4"270
77Jeremiah StallworthOLSO6'7"325
78Richard McKayOLJR6'6"300
79Dylan SpencerOLJR6'7"315
5Nick DimitrisDLSR6'4"305
7Kaden BriggsDLJR6'3"285
9Malik TullisDLSR6'0"283
32Peyton McCutcheonDLFR6'3"225
45Xavier WilliamsDLSR6'2"251
50Federico CobarubioDLFR6'2"303
52Isiah ChalaDLJR6'4"275
54Brodie TagaloaDLSR6'5"294
55Miles BaileyDLSR6'4"297
58Jamel HowardDLJR6'2"307
90Austin ChambersDLSO6'2"270
91Maliek RichardsonDLJR6'1"358
93Malachi KindleDLSO6'0"308
94Austin AtenDLFR6'4"240
95Will WeberDLJR6'3"280
96Jadakiss VaokakalaDLJR6'2"280
98Collin KallhoffDLJR6'4"268
99Devyn BlakeDLFR6'1"300
4Dante AntoniniLBSR6'1"226
8Darson JeantyLBSR6'3"215
10Derek HoustonLBJR6'1"223
11Ivan Moore Jr.LBSO6'4"217
15KJ JeffersonLBSO6'0"209
16Leki HolaniLBFR6'0"226
17Dylan GoodenLBSO6'4"215
18Fata PulokaLBJR6'3"224
26Tim ThomasLBSR6'1"236
28Jiah WallsLBFR6'1"212
31Jackson CahoonLBFR6'0"219
33Alex RochaLBSR6'1"213
40Iosefa LealofiLBFR6'0"215
41Pheta TofaeonoLBFR6'1"225
44Diego DavisLBSR6'0"235
2Dionte ThorntonCBSR6'4"183
12Malikai NicholsCBSO5'11"167
21Adam TaylorCBSO5'10"159
22Elias MullicanCBSR6'1"180
24Kyle GurganiousCBSO5'11"180
29Caleb ReeseCBFR5'11"187
30Nikko KlemmCBSO5'11"169
38Tim Edwards Jr.CBFR6'0"170
0Donovan TurnerSSR6'0"190
1Boogsie SilveraSSR5'11"200
3Amari WallaceSFR5'10"185
6Warren Smith Jr.SJR6'2"189
13Diesel GordonSJR6'0"168
14Joshua HolaniSFR5'10"180
19Miles TuckerSJR6'0"188
20Qualyn McQueenSSR5'9"182
23Chakai ScottSFR5'9"172
25Naytel MitchellSFR5'10"191
27Noah KingSFR6'3"209
39Keyon MillsSSO5'11"185
9Saul MarksPKFR6'0"160
49Grant MeadorsPKJR5'11"174
35Jay BrockhausPJR6'1"198
37Hamish AdamsPFR6'2"202
46Mike MelansonPSR5'11"182
47Caden SimLSFR6'1"200
48Kellan SuttonLSJR6'2"201

Team Statistics · per game, with national FBS rank

Points / game
24.0
scoring offense
Points allowed
25.7
scoring defense
Differential
-1.7
per game
Offense
Total yards / game
327.7#113
Yards / play
5.0#120
Passing yards / game
206.3#91
Rushing yards / game
121.3#110
First downs / game
18.3#105
3rd down %
31.7%#117
4th down %
42.9%#89
Time of possession
29:49#84
Defense
Yards allowed / game
345.7#82
Yards / play allowed
5.6#99
Pass yards allowed / game
223.7#93
Rush yards allowed / game
122.0#75
3rd down % allowed
28.9%#37
Sacks
6#20
Tackles for loss
18#10
Turnovers & Discipline
Turnover margin
-3#125
Takeaways
2#76
Giveaways
5#124
Penalties / game
7.0#76
Penalty yards / game
60.0#85

Rank is national among all FBS teams (#1 = best), oriented so higher rank = better even for defensive and discipline metrics. Bars show percentile.

Scouting Report · 2026 projection

Sacramento State is in year 1 under Alonzo Carter. No unit here sits far enough from the national average to build a plan around — nothing to lean on, and nothing obvious to attack.

Sacramento State has played 2 games against an average slate, adjusted for here. That football carries about 0% of what is below; the rest is still the preseason projection.

Each bar is where this team sits in the country. Before the season has produced enough football these are PROJECTIONS — last season regressed to the mean, plus talent, returning production, recruiting and whether the staff is the same one — and the season replaces them as it is played. Head coaches only — there is no free feed for coordinators, so on a program where the head coach does not call the offense this describes the staff he hired. Play-calling identity is a style, not a grade: throwing more than the situations warrant is not better than throwing less than they warrant.

2026 Season Projection

model win prob · 9 to play
7.3 – 4.7
projected final record (now 1–2)
Exp. wins left
6.3
of 9 games
Bowl odds
92%
reach 6 wins
Best odds
99%
vs Massachusetts
Toughest
28%
vs Hawai'i

How the season could finish · 2026 · chance of each final win total · 9 games left

Every remaining game simulated from the model's win probability for it. Tallest bar is the single likeliest finish, not a prediction that it happens.

12345678910
final winstallest bar = 30% chance
Likeliest finish 7-5 (30%)Bowl eligible 92% · marked on the axis at 6

Player Value

EPA contribution by position group + estimated NIL market value (derived from position rates and on-field production — not actual deal figures).

Unit Value — Total EPA
WRJace Wilson, Matthew Coleman +3
+17.8 EPA
QBCarson Conklin, Jackson Sharman
+5.5 EPA
RBJamar Curtis, Cincere Rhaney +3
+2.4 EPA
TEJordan Williams, Cedric Anton +2
-1.1 EPA

Total EPA produced by each positional group this season. OL value is captured via the rush/pass efficiency of skill players; OL-specific EPA isn't separately reported.

Estimated NIL Market Value
ESTIMATED
QBJackson Sharman
~$614K
EPA +9.30.216/play43 snaps
QBCarson Conklin
~$420K
EPA -3.8-0.079/play48 snaps
WROnterrio Smith Jr.
~$326K
EPA +10.20.508/play20 snaps
WRMatthew Coleman
~$194K
EPA +1.20.052/play23 snaps
RBJamar Curtis
~$145K
EPA -2.6-0.118/play22 snaps

Estimated from position-group market rates and on-field EPA contribution. Actual NIL valuations depend on social media following, brand fit, and market negotiations — these figures are directional only.

The Five Factors

ranked vs. FBS · bar = better
Efficiency (PPA)
Off0.0411th#123
Def0.0855th#63
Explosiveness
Off1.1018th#114
Def1.3136th#88
Field position
Off69.650th#70
Def70.866th#47
Finishing (pts/opp)
Off3.2226th#103
Def3.6534th#92
Turnovers
Won 2Lost 5
Margin -3

Opponent-adjusted efficiency

EPA/play vs. schedule
Offense
—
Defense
—
Off · pass
0.0710th#124
Off · rush
0.0120th#111

Pass vs. rush (PPA)

Rushing
Off0.0118th#113
Def-0.1580th#28
Passing
Off0.079th#125
Def0.3326th#103

Trenches & disruption

Line yards (off)
1.76#137
2nd-level / open-field
0.78 / 0.64
Power / stuff (off)
75.0% / 33.3%
Havoc — total (def)
14.4%#93
Havoc — front 7 / DB
11.7% / 2.7%

Standard vs. passing downs

Pro
Std downs
Off0.06
Def0.12
Pass downs
Off0.01
Def0.01

PPA on each down type (off vs. def).

Opponent-adjusted by down

Pro
1st2nd3rd
Offense-0.15#1290.10#960.25#113
Defense0.20#1300.00#430.09#22

Elo Trajectory

@Eastern MichiganFinal
Elo rating 1500 → 1324-176 over season

Team Fingerprint · 2026 · 44 opponent-adjusted metrics · percentile vs 138 FBS teams

Plot these →
worst in FBSbest

Efficiency

  • Offense EPA/play0.0718th
  • Defense EPA/play allowed0.1047th
  • Offense success rate41%33rd
  • Defense success rate allowed36%58th

Downs

  • Offense success — standard downs50%54th
  • Offense success — passing downs22%14th
  • Defense success allowed — standard downs43%48th
  • Defense success allowed — passing downs19%86th

Explosiveness

  • Offense explosiveness1.115th
  • Defense explosiveness allowed1.330th
  • Offense explosiveness — standard downs1.048th
  • Offense explosiveness — passing downs1.34th

Trenches

  • Offense line yards2.14th
  • Defense line yards allowed2.654th
  • Offense highlight yards1.152nd
  • Defense highlight yards allowed1.418th
  • Offense power success0.7245th
  • Defense power success allowed0.7345th
  • Offense stuff rate0.323rd
  • Defense stuff rate0.2040th

Third down

  • Third down conversion33%21st
  • Third down distance faced7.138th
  • Third down conversion allowed29%77th
  • Third down distance forced7.664th

Halves

  • Net success rate — first half-0.0814th
  • Net success rate — second half0.1882nd

Drives

  • Points per drive0.5910th
  • Points per drive allowed2.835th
  • Average starting field position2739th
  • Opponent starting field position2946th
  • Available yards gained29%13th
  • Available yards allowed58%31st
  • Scoring opportunities per drive55%7th
  • Scoring opportunities allowed67%87th
  • Points per scoring opportunity1.110th
  • Points allowed per opportunity4.612th
  • Three-and-out rate36%26th
  • Three-and-outs forced21%42nd

CORE

  • CORE offense-10.93rd
  • CORE defense3.032nd
  • CORE overall-13.94th

Roster

  • Team talent composite56118th
  • Recruiting class rank1259th
  • Recruiting class points1619th

Every metric is opponent-adjusted and ranked so that higher is always better — a defensive rate that is good when low is ranked accordingly. Sack and tackle-for-loss composition are deliberately absent: their relationship to team quality is a measured null, so they carry a style rather than a rank, and they appear in the pressure signature instead.

Intelligence Report

⚡

Offensive DNA

Balanced offense — below average EPA/play nationally
EPA/play
+0.043#123 · bottom 20%
Pass EPA/play
+0.073#125
Rush EPA/play
+0.006#113
Explosiveness
1.103#114
Pts/opportunity
3.22#103
Success rate
36.3%

Pass efficiency edge: 0.066 EPA/play

🛡

Defensive Identity

EPA/play allowed
+0.081#63 · average
Havoc rate (total)
14.4%#93
Front-7 havoc
11.7%
DB havoc
2.7%
Big play rate allowed
1.311#88
Success rate allowed
37.4%

Disruption comes primarily from the front seven.

📊

Season Signature

24.0 PPG offense, 25.7 allowed — -1.7 margin/game
Points per game
24.0
Points allowed/game
25.7
Scoring margin/game
-1.7
Turnover margin
-3won 2 · lost 5
Talent rank (247)
#114

1-2 record through 3 games.

Team Shape · percentile vs. FBS · dashed = 50th

OFFENSE11thEXPLOSIVENESS18thFINISHING26thFIELD POS50thDEFENSE55thHAVOC33th50th100th
Offense
11th
Explosiveness
18th
Finishing
26th
Field Pos
50th
Defense
55th
Havoc
33th

Each axis = national percentile rank. 100th = best in FBS, 0th = worst. Defense and Havoc are oriented so higher = better.

The season, week by week · 2026

A season-long average is taken over a period during which the team changed. This is the same numbers as a trajectory, so a mid-season turn is visible instead of averaged away.

Offense EPA/play▲ 0.201 in the second half
-0.080.110.30112

Line is the season-to-date average — the number the rest of this page reports. Bars are the individual weeks that moved it.

Defense EPA allowed▲ 0.010 in the second half
-0.210.050.30112

Line is the season-to-date average — the number the rest of this page reports. Bars are the individual weeks that moved it.

Offense success rate▲ 0.039 in the second half
0.340.370.40112

Line is the season-to-date average — the number the rest of this page reports. Bars are the individual weeks that moved it.

Defense success allowed▲ 0.132 in the second half
0.080.280.49112

Line is the season-to-date average — the number the rest of this page reports. Bars are the individual weeks that moved it.

CORE efficiency · situation and opponent removed

Points per 100 plays above average, after the game state is regressed out of every snap and the schedule is solved out across the whole league. The version of this team’s efficiency that can be compared to a team it never played.

Overall
-20.4
#131
Offense
-13.8
#133
Defense
+6.7
#113
Full CORE ratings →

What a possession is worth · 22 drives

MeasureOffenseDefense
Points per drive0.592.75
Starting field positionown 27.2own 28.9
Available yards28.8%58.1%
Scoring opportunities54.5%66.7%
Points per opportunity1.084.56
Three-and-out rate36.4%20.8%
Every team’s drive efficiency →

Play-calling identity

Against what the league calls from the same down, distance, field position, score and clock — so this is the staff, not the game script.

Pass rate
71.6%
Expected, given the spots
57.7%
Over expected
+13.9
Fourth down vs peers
+3
Fourth down vs the model
-43
All play-calling tendencies →

National Landscape · 2026 FBS · offense vs. defense EPA/play

Each dot = one FBS team. Sacramento State is highlighted. Tap or hover a dot for details.

ELITEDEF. FORTRESSOFF. POWERHOUSEREBUILDING-0.100.00+0.10+0.20+0.30-0.050.00+0.10+0.20Offensive EPA/play← worsebetter →Defensive EPA allowed/play← worsebetter →

Similar Programs

Teams with the closest offense + defense efficiency profile to Sacramento State in 2026

by EPA/play distance
Eastern MichiganSP+ -15.6
Off EPA/play +0.041Def EPA/play +0.115Elo 1353
Match
98%
Utah StateSP+ -11.5
Off EPA/play +0.052Def EPA/play +0.044Elo 1376
Match
98%
CaliforniaSP+ -3.4
Off EPA/play +0.057Def EPA/play +0.119Elo 1349
Match
98%
Georgia TechSP+ +1.7
Off EPA/play +0.041Def EPA/play +0.141Elo 1553
Match
97%
BuffaloSP+ -11.6
Off EPA/play +0.104Def EPA/play +0.072Elo 1365
Match
96%
LibertySP+ -7.2
Off EPA/play -0.027Def EPA/play +0.094Elo 1697
Match
96%

Similarity = normalized Euclidean distance on season offensive and defensive EPA/play. Teams within ±0.02 EPA/play on both units score >90%.

Program History

recent seasons
YearOverallConfWin %xWLuck
20261-20-1
33%
1.1-0.1
20257-55-3
58%
7.4-0.4
20243-91-7
25%
3.4-0.4
20238-54-4
62%
7.5+0.5
202212-18-0
92%
10.1+1.9
20219-38-0
75%
0.0+9.0
20199-48-1
69%
0.0+9.0
20182-81-6
20%
0.0+2.0
20177-46-3
64%
0.0+7.0
20162-82-7
20%
0.0+2.0

xW = expected wins from per-game dominance. Luck = actual − expected (positive = won close games).

0%of 50,000 simulated 2026 seasons end with them in the field

0-2 so far, projected to finish 2.1-9.9.

up 0.0 points since preseason — lost 17-28 to Eastern Michigan against an expected margin of −26, so +15.2 against the number.

  • The Mid-American takes 0.07 bids in an average season.
The full playoff picture →

Mid-American

0-1 in league play, projected 0.9-7.113 of 13 by title odds
0%
Wins the Mid-American
0.0%
Reaches the title game

The Mid-American sends its top two by conference winning percentage, head-to-head breaking a tie. The last berth is level on percentage in 46% of simulated seasons, so a tiebreaker decides it about that often.

Points of title probability riding on each result. The whole Mid-American race →

If not the playoff, then

1.1%
Bowl eligible
0.9%
Placed in a bowl
0%
In the playoff
99%
Season over in November

Sacramento State is 1-2 and needs 5 more wins from 9 games to reach the six that make a team eligible — at most one of which may come against an FCS opponent.

  • Salute to Veterans Bowl0.3%
  • Famous Idaho Potato Bowl0.3%

Every bowl, and how each one picks →

✓/✗ = whether our pregame model picked the winner. Win % & projections from the Gridpex model. Data: CollegeFootballData.